Hi Ion, this is a good idea, lots of trouble come from the time, where the schematics where drawn by hand, and the designer and layouter used the phone instead of a netlist. So the common use, not to draw the power and GND pins of an IC. I changed all my lib-parts so, that the power pins are on the first part on a multi-part component only and visible. The spare units of this component is drawn somewhere on the same sheet. Therefore, always any part of a component should be on the schematic, and it is useful to have a erc process to test this. Georg > -----Urspr ngliche Nachricht----- > Von: Ian Wilson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Gesendet: Mittwoch, 23. Mai 2001 01:19 > An: Protel EDA Forum > Betreff: [PEDA] Suggestion - Imporoved ERC/Sch Library integration > > > I would like the Sch ERC process to be able to inspect the parts of a > multi-part component and warn if all parts are not placed. > Especially so > that unplaced parts carrying inputs and power pins can be detected. > > I think this would help overcome the situation where Protel > uses hidden > power pins on each part of its multi-part (logic especially) > parts in order > to ensure power is connected regardless of which or how many > of the parts > are placed. There would be less tendency to use hidden pins > as if desired > a separate power-only part can created and the user is safe in the > knowledge that they will be warned if this power part is not placed. > > I think there should be an ERC option to warn of non-placed > parts and an > another option to inspect unplaced parts for floating inputs > and power pins. > > Actually, I would like to see ERC become more elaborate - > like the PCB > rules system. I would like a rules based ERC. Currently we > can place a > no-erc directive when we have, for instance, two output pins shorted > together to prevent a warning. But this No-Erc directive > blocks all ERC > testing on that pin. I would like to be able to, for > instance, say that it > is OK for U2-pin3 to short to U4-pin11 but no-other outputs. > > I am for a more elaborate rules based ERC with the ability to > look into > unplaced parts of multi-part components. > > Any comments? > > Ian Wilson > * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * To post a message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * * To leave this list visit: * http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/subscrib.html * - or email - * mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?body=leave%20proteledaforum * * Contact the list manager: * mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * * Browse or Search previous postings: * http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected] * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
